I'm running some test cases on JBossWS side to validate the JBMETA-44 and I've
just come to this:
"alex.loubyansky(a)jboss.com" wrote : Another question related to JBMETA-44 and
JBCTS-797. It's not clear to me how the @WebServiceRef should be mapped to
ServiceReferenceMetaData.
|
| What (if anything) in @WebServiceRef should specify the service-interface?
|
| The current processing of @WebServiceRef is
| if(annotation.type() != Object.class)
| | ref.setServiceRefType(annotation.type().getName());
| | else
| | ref.setServiceRefType(getType(element));
| | if(annotation.value() != Object.class)
| | ref.setServiceInterface(annotation.value().getName());
| |
|
| Is this correct? The example Scott posted above is from JBCTS-797 which currently
fails because "service-interface is null".
|
Yes, as Thomas said, this should be the right implementation.
I've just seen that commit 74508 changed the implementation to:
| if(annotation.type() != Object.class)
| ref.setServiceRefType(annotation.type().getName());
| else
| ref.setServiceRefType(getType(element));
| if(annotation.value() != Object.class)
| ref.setServiceInterface(annotation.value().getName());
| else
| ref.setServiceInterface(ref.getServiceRefType());
|
In my opinion this is not right since you might end up having the SEI class name in the
serviceInterface attribute in cases where a reference whose type is a SEI is defined.
The above change was done because of the "<service-interface> cannot be
null" error at the beginning of this thread that actually proved to be caused by the
annotatedElement not being set, wan't it?
Thanks
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159286#...
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...